Navigation

The Rational Response Squad is a group of atheist activists who impact society by changing the way we view god belief. This site is a haven for those who are pushing back against the norm, and a place for believers of gods to have their beliefs exposed as false should they want to try their hand at confronting us.

Buy any item on AMAZON, and we'll use the small commission to help end theism, dogma, violence, hatred, and other irrationality. Buy an Xbox 360 -- PS3 -- Laptop -- Apple

Pineapple tries for an attention grabbing thread title and fails (AIGS)

Posted on: October 14, 2011 - 12:44pm

Cpt_pineapple

Posts: 5492

Joined: 2007-04-12

Offline

Pineapple tries for an attention grabbing thread title and fails (AIGS)

Congratulations to Dylan Smith 16 of New York City for his hard hitting economic model of raising the min wage to $20 and open borders for immigrants, but closed for foreign imports of creating so many jobs, open borders are necessary to fill them.

A truly remarkable economic model indeed.

Here's the list of the proposed demands and see just how Dylan earned this Prestigious award

Admin note: This is not an official list of demands. This is a forum post submitted by a single user and hyped by irresponsible news/commentary agencies like Fox News and Mises.org. This content was not published by the OccupyWallSt.org collective, nor was it ever proposed or agreed to on a consensus basis with the NYC General Assembly. There is NO official list of demands.

Demand one: Restoration of the living wage. This demand can only be met by ending "Freetrade" by re-imposing trade tariffs on all imported goods entering the American market to level the playing field for domestic family farming and domestic manufacturing as most nations that are dumping cheap products onto the American market have radical wage and environmental regulation advantages. Another policy that must be instituted is raise the minimum wage to twenty dollars an hr.

Demand two: Institute a universal single payer healthcare system. To do this all private insurers must be banned from the healthcare market as their only effect on the health of patients is to take money away from doctors, nurses and hospitals preventing them from doing their jobs and hand that money to wall st. investors.

Demand three: Guaranteed living wage income regardless of employment.

Demand four: Free college education.

Demand five: Begin a fast track process to bring the fossil fuel economy to an end while at the same bringing the alternative energy economy up to energy demand.

Demand seven: One trillion dollars in ecological restoration planting forests, reestablishing wetlands and the natural flow of river systems and decommissioning of all of America's nuclear power plants.

Demand eight: Racial and gender equal rights amendment.

Demand nine: Open borders migration. anyone can travel anywhere to work and live.

Demand ten: Bring American elections up to international standards of a paper ballot precinct counted and recounted in front of an independent and party observers system.

Demand eleven: Immediate across the board debt forgiveness for all. Debt forgiveness of sovereign debt, commercial loans, home mortgages, home equity loans, credit card debt, student loans and personal loans now! All debt must be stricken from the "Books." World Bank Loans to all Nations, Bank to Bank Debt and all Bonds and Margin Call Debt in the stock market including all Derivatives or Credit Default Swaps, all 65 trillion dollars of them must also be stricken from the "Books." And I don't mean debt that is in default, I mean all debt on the entire planet period.

Demand twelve: Outlaw all credit reporting agencies.

Demand thirteen: Allow all workers to sign a ballot at any time during a union organizing campaign or at any time that represents their yeah or nay to having a union represent them in collective bargaining or to form a union.

These demands will create so many jobs it will be completely impossible to fill them without an open borders policy.

Some of those suggestions are ridiculous. This kid needs to put a lot more thought into his proposal and its consequences. Not that I'm surprised. No 16 year old has enough of a grasp on the inherent flaws of society today to be able to plan a fix. He might have a better grasp on the situation in another 10 years or so.

Greetings. I have a Ph.D. in economics and I know fuck all just like everyone else.

Signed,

Self-important Random Economics Expert, Ph.D.

Hi. I have this brilliant economics model but unfortunately, like every other economics model proposed since the early 19th century, it's doomed to fail. Epically.

Signed,

Kid from Wallstreet

On a less silly note; yes, there are two sides to every argument, but what I refer to goes deeper than that. Cj's remarks about blended economic models is particularly astute in the sense that economics is such a chaotic, fluid field of study that relies on yet another field of study: psychology. Psychology is problematic in the sense that no major advances have been made in over 100 years. Economics is problematic because the data we do have can not be strung together in a single, coherent theory. This isn't to suggest that economics is science-proof in the way that Austrian School would have everyone believe; merely that it is so at this present point in time.

You could try to argue that whatever pet theory you support regarding the exchange of resources is the correct one, and you would be wrong, regardless of what "theory" that is. You can not formulate ideal models or theories of global economics, or anything resembling as much. It is a myth; an urban legend. The best you can do, is attempt to formulate a means to successfully integrate your ideals into politics and management of resources. You can also somewhat accurately predict how a single person will act given a robust set of circumstances. Not 7 billion people, though. Not even close.

If any one of you devises a means to corner every possible market based on material resources, I'd be interested in what you have to say about economics.

Until then, not so much. Discussions like these lead to what Brian37 calls "utopia thinking" and since I think I understand what he means by that, I'm inclined to agree.

“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)

??? What do you mean by that? I mean, how big a discovery should be to have the label "major"? Even if it was not "big", who cares? It advances a little a time, step by step, why should a major advance occour?

??? What do you mean by that? I mean, how big a discovery should be to have the label "major"? Even if it was not "big", who cares? It advances a little a time, step by step, why should a major advance occour?

Whatta mean is: Physics outpaces psychology by leaps and bounds. So does chemistry, biology, and neurology. Physical medicine has left psychology behind in a cloud of dust, in the 20th century. Psychiatry has left psychology behind, too, although progress is slowed by what is called today "magic pill syndrome". Economic studies, that I understand, are good for two things: how do I increase my bottom line, and how do we implement x, where x= plan for growth.

Certainly, economics is so complex, so dynamic, and so chaotic that no mathematician, philosopher, author or computer publicly known can even somewhat accurately predict it's future course. If you recognize a likely "future" trend in economics, that is because such a trend is likely already in effect, it simply hasn't 'peaked' yet. An example of this, would be naked shortselling -essentially buying and selling stock with money you don't actually have yet- during 2008 and 2009. Laws are in effect that attempt to put a lid on naked shortsales, but since law is hardly ever optimally enacted, people still naked shortsell anyhow. Even though this is a practice that is nearly equal to conventional theft, individuals that hail from the fringes of politics defend the practice anyways. I can't say I credit them with an abundance of brains.

In any case, modern economics is the puzzle no one can currently solve. I suspect, that until a computer is devised that can think creatively as any human yet make thousands or even millions of highly-intelligent decisions per second in as much of a runtime-efficient manner as possible... we will be limited to taking baby steps in terms of understanding how resources are distributed and used, how people will react to the manner in which said distributions and uses occur, how people cause said distributions and uses. Since such an apex of 'economic comprehension' almost certainly requires understanding how billions of people think and act, it would (at least!) require exponentially higher raw computing power than what is available at present.

It is important to point out should such a computer or AI be developed with so much power over the wellbeing of so many people, someone will also be in a position to engage any number of failsafes or "off switches" should such a machine or machines 'misbehave'. At least, so I currently hypothesize. Also, it may not be one entity, but several that act cooperatively to understand how markets work in totality, in the same sense that scientific advance revolves around thousands of individuals now rather than a select handful as it likely did during the (largely illiterate) 17th century.

Either way, math is HARD, and so is economics and psychology.

“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)

Some of those suggestions are ridiculous. This kid needs to put a lot more thought into his proposal and its consequences. Not that I'm surprised. No 16 year old has enough of a grasp on the inherent flaws of society today to be able to plan a fix. He might have a better grasp on the situation in another 10 years or so.

I don`t know who made the list, or how old they were. I put that in for dramatic effect and would have made more sense if the topic title stayed intact.

Obviously. But mainly because I have to read everything around here regardless of what it is.

I can only imagine how hardcore that sucks, but it does explain the TFI image macros you hand out every now and then.

“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)

Some of those suggestions are ridiculous. This kid needs to put a lot more thought into his proposal and its consequences. Not that I'm surprised. No 16 year old has enough of a grasp on the inherent flaws of society today to be able to plan a fix. He might have a better grasp on the situation in another 10 years or so.

I don`t know who made the list, or how old they were. I put that in for dramatic effect and would have made more sense if the topic title stayed intact.

And what is this glorious title that couldn't be done away with but had to anyways because it just didn't fit?

“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)